June 18, 2010

It's kind of pathetic that the refs manufactured a before-the-goal foul that no one else saw or can even describe, in spite the multiple cameras pointed at the field and the varied POVs the videos can show.

And you wonder why Americans don't like soccer? The refs wanted us to lose but had to settle for the tie.

85 comments:

It's kind of pathetic that the refs manufactured a before-the-goal foul that no one else saw or can even describe, in spite the multiple cameras pointed at the field and the varied POVs the videos can show.

And you wonder why Americans don't like soccer? The refs wanted us to lose but had to settle for the tie.

Very entertaining game to watch though. The Slovenians were better in the first half, the US in the second. If the US beats Alegeria, which they should do, they'll most likely advance to the next round.

Anyone watch the NBA finals? I didn't, because I knew that butt-rapist Kobe Bryant would be allowed to pick up the ball and walk to the basket, and anyone thinking about defending him would be called for a foul. I'd rather watch professional wrestling.

Actually this has, up until today, been the best referred world cup I have ever seen by far (going back to 1982). We got screwed today, but if we somehow get to the round of 16 in spite of the ref suckage, then all's well that ends well.

The difference is that in the NBA, the referees at least have to come up with a call--"fouled in the act of shooting", which can be checked against the video and reviewed by league officials. The ref in the U.S.-Slovenia game didn't explain what rule violation resulted in the goal getting called back, and didn't have to. That's insane.

That's the problem in international sports - its played differently than in the US.

Reffing soccer is difficult. The ref has to run for 90 miuntes and keep control of 22 players (of whom many will do their best to deceive the ref). Even the best refs will make a few mistakes in a game.

Granted the soccer refs can make mistakes. But if the refs call a foul, then they should be able to tell us what the foul was. If they can't then the foul hsould not be called. You can't call a foul just because you want to. There needs to be a reason and the ref should state what that reason was.

Yes, bad calls get made all the time, refs make mistakes, etc. All that's true, but it's also true that not all bad calls are equal. When a call changes the outcome of a game in the final minutes, the call better be right. That's particularly true in a sport, such as soccer, that is low scoring. The fact goals are score at a rate of one for every 45 minutes or so of play seems to concentrate the importance of the time around a scoring opportunity. An off sides call that takes away a break away opportunity might deprive a team of a third of the team's legitimate scoring opportunities.

It was an awful call, but bad calls happen a LOT in American sports. Ask Armando Galarraga. The main exception is American Football, and that's mostly because of replay. But there are bad calls in the NFL too. Ask Ed Hochuli and the 2008 San Diego Chargers.

Rather than igniting a debate about officiating in soccer versus in other sports, this bad call, like the Galarraga bad call, should ignite a debate about why ALL sports need replay and to try and start removing "the human element" as much as possible from the officiating.

Also, it seems pretty clear to me that whenever somebody says "I hate SPORT X" or "SPORT X is boring", it's because they don't understand SPORT X. I'm not an expert on soccer, but I understand that there's a lot of game going on even when a goal is not being scored. One time I was at a baseball game and explaining how it worked to my then girlfriend. After a while, she says "oh, so most of the game occurs between the pitcher and the hitter before the ball is even hit?" And I was like "duh" until I realized most of the people in the crowd were probably just like her, and just sitting there waiting for a hit too.

I hate auto racing and I have a hard time watching hockey, but I fully admit that it's just because I haven't taken the time to understand them on the proper level.

If you looking for a defender of David Stern or Bud Selig, you won't find one here. But, FIFA makes those crooked little shits look like amateurs. The FIFA refs don't just have the occasional bad call. They consistently have bad calls to protect the big teams. France advanced to the cup on a no call after a hand ball by France. France was more important than Ireland and it had to make the tournement.

Now Solvenia is not an important country. And if it had been playing France or Brazil, the refs would have been screwing them just like they did the US. But, since "Screw the American" is the favorite indoor outdoor sport of all Eurotrash, Solvenia benefited from us getting screwed.

American don't like soccer because we are cursed by our exceptionalism. We don't like ties, quiche, rice or socialism either. The fact that the rest of the world does is reason enough not to. Somebody needs to be different on this damned planet.

A travel or palming occurs on virtually every drive to the basket in the NBA. And they're never called -- unless it's on a rookie, against an elite team that's supposed to win, and the rookie is defended by someone with a big reputation.

The NBA is performance art, no more. It's not an actual competition; results are predetermined. It's professional wrestling, with taller people and better marketing.

I think one of the best thing the NFL ever did was requiring the ref to state what the penalty was and on whom it was called.

Not having to state what penalty you just called is crap.

And that is the effective answer to every "Soccer is the World's Sport" True Believer.

And THAT is because we live in a world that is has far less respect for the rule of law than the United States.

WHICH is just one more way the United States is better - not "different" but BETTER - than every other country on the planet.

That's today's lesson in what should have been taught as basic civics in our public school system, the one major area that the US is NOT better than everyone else. Gee - I wonder which philosophy has been predominate in the US Public School System these last 50 years that has led to such a shame in the face of the world? Let's see, it's definitely not conservatism and I know it starts with an "L" . . . .

PS My son had a Soccer scholarship to college for 2 years, and I coached him when he was little, but enough with the soccer worship.

Random remembrances of soccer: Men like the feel of kicking a rocket shot at the goal and kicking the perfect pass because we like to hit things with an extension of our bodies. More men/boys can play it successfully since the midfielders don't need height, instead they need balance. There are no heavy soccer players needed. Only the Goalie needs to be a taller man. It is a game that rewards endurance and sudden bursts of speed. The only sport requiring any better conditioning than soccer is freestyle amature wrestling.

The only time soccer wasn't gay, was when on 10 July 1999 at the Women's World Cup at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California, after scoring the fifth penalty kick to give the United States the win over China in the final game, Chastain celebrated by peeling off her jersey and falling to her knees in a sports bra, her fists clenched.

Spare me the "Americans don't like it because they don't understand it" bullshit. Fact is, for many Americans it is a very popular participatory sport but it is fucking boring as shit to watch. Sure, a lot is going on between scoring but it is still boring.

A sport in which the refs/officials can call a foul nullify a goal and not have to tell the players or coaches the nature of the foul is bullshit and violates basic notions of fair play, due process and notice.

I'm tired of hearing how most of the world loves soccer. Most of the world also drinks water that has parasites in it but that doesn't make it anymore appealing to me.

The list of things wrong with World Cup soccer, and mostly not wrong with most American sports, is long. Some of the items have been noted above. Here we go:

1) "Nobody knows how much time is left except the ref."

2) The ref can make a goal- and game-stealing call without even saying what the call is.

3) The offside rule.

4) Nobody scores (see especially item 3).

5) Games end in ties.

6) Games that don't end in ties end in penalty kicks.

7) Penalty kicks in general.

8) Players routinely feign major injury, complete with medical attention and stretchers, only to bounce right back in later.

9) The offside rule.

10) The ball changes shape, stitching, and colors from one competition to the next. Everyone whines about this and blames goals on the ball (despite the fact that whatever advantages and disadvantages said ball may impart fall evenly on both teams), yet nobody does anything about it.

11) Apparently no attempt to refine the officiating process. Again, there's no official clock, just an apparently flimsy old Timex on the ref's wrist. There's no replay review, and when refs obviously blow calls, they don't seem to discuss or think about it afterward.

Baseball has a few similar faults. NBA basketball, as noted above, has almost no real officiating at all when it counts. NFL football alone, among major American sports, is pretty clean.

Americans tend to want major sports to offer a good chance for success and excitement (scoring) on a level playing field (good officiating) with predictable boundaries (clock) and non-stupid rules (no offside silliness). Soccer fails.

"I understand professional basketball just fine. I still can't stand it."

I'm talking about the sport, not the league. I'm guessing that since you specified pro basketball, your gripe is with the NBA more than it is with the sport.

"It's still a really boring game to watch. And while I don't hate soccer exactly, I do hate the fucked up nationalistic baggage that comes with soccer as 'the world's sport'."

Your statement is totally contradictory. If it's boring to watch, why do most people say that it is their favorite sport to watch. It's referred to as the world's sport because that is totally true.

"A sport in which the refs/officials can call a foul nullify a goal and not have to tell the players or coaches the nature of the foul is bullshit and violates basic notions of fair play, due process and notice. "

Yes, this is bad. Obviously. This problem should be repaired.

"I'm tired of hearing how most of the world loves soccer. Most of the world also drinks water that has parasites in it but that doesn't make it anymore appealing to me."

Most of the world chooses to love soccer. Most of the world does not choose to drink water with parasites in it.

Depends on what is meant by conditioning. Marathon runners, skiier and cyclists probably have better cardiovascular/respiratory conditioning (but not by much), fighters and sprinters might have better strength and agility. But soccer players really are WAY up there in both of those facets of fitness and near the top in stamina, speed, power, coordination, balance, accuracy and power. Rugby players too.

"The only sport requiring any better conditioning than soccer is freestyle amature wrestling."

While I love soccer I have to disagree with this. Generally the argument goes something like:

-they run, on average, 7 miles a game-they are required to periodically sprint

I played soccer for 12 years, year round and I have to say that I am in far better condition due to taking up running. 7 miles is nothing. I just did that this morning for my easy work out, and I did it in under an hour.

The dirty secret about soccer is that most of the game is either spent standing around or at a light jog. Yes, certain positions will have to do more running than others (midfielders) but when the ball is not near them and there is no chance of them being part of a play they are basically doing nothing.

But soccer players really are WAY up there in both of those facets of fitness and near the top in stamina, speed, power, coordination, balance, accuracy and power.

Let's keep apples to apples, though, and at least agree that it's silliness realized to compare team sports to individual sports. Further, some of those things mentioned I would classify as competitions rather than sports.

This may be just me, but from where I'm sitting, having played competitively almost all my life, a sport is where the two sides are battling over/with an object and are trying, against each other, to put it somewhere the other side doesn't want it, ie goals, endzones, etc.

Competitions, like all forms of racing (minus rollerball, but that's another thread) are just side by side contest of, usually, individual skill/conditioning.

Last, I would like to have power defined in this context. If it's meant as a measure of strength, I think one would be hard-pressed to come up with a team sport that requires (yes, requires) more whole-body strength than American football.

@ Jayne Cobb...Maybe I should have narrowed my comment to competitive sports, and not just sports. All races over a quarter mile are also conditioning contests. But man against man involving a continuous resistance from a determined opponent is a "competitive sport". The soccer rules that I remember made the starting players stay in for the entire match, because once taken out for a rest, they cannot return. I as a half-back I just remember running until we dropped.

RE: offside-- it's pretty detailed, but strange. There aren't very many rules in major sports that do so much damage. Offside infractions enable defenders to create turnovers even when the ball is nowhere near them and the offensive player "committing" the foul (actually defenders just taking a step or two forward, in unison) isn't really affecting the gameplay at all. The offside rule kills scoring, because it makes soccer extraordinarily defensive. It also effectively kills serious come-from-behind situations. Did you notice how today's USA/Slovenia game was called "historic" not just because of the bad call, but because it's one of the rather few times any team has ever come back from a 2-0 deficit? That's because the offside rule makes it almost impossible-- without it, desperate teams trying to come from behind would post strikers nearer the goal in hopes of scoring on a freak accident.

Of course, without it, the field would also open up. Without it, scores would go up. Without it, ties would be rarer, and overtime periods would be realistic ways of settling contests. Without it, soccer might actually be interesting.

But with it, and with lousy, unaccountable refereeing, soccer rather looks like the United Nations or the European Union. The best team need not win.

The NFL and even the NBA review rules and possibilities constantly, trying to improve the games. MLB is fairly hidebound by history, rather like the World Cup, but then again, MLB is almost fifty years older than the World Cup, so soccer's claim to some kind of untouchable historical legacy, rule-wise, is bogus by comparison.

The World Cup is a great and fun spectacle. Don't fuck soccer. Fuck the refs.

The bottom line is that the world doesn't want the United States to win the World Cup. It would be so grossly unfair, like if Ashton Kutcher were also the valedictorian of his high school and the richest kid in town. And had a huge penis.

Robert -- There's some truth there, but you are taking it too far. Why, if you are right, don't Grenada or Burundi ever make the World Cup? And how in the hell will the Royals get to 65 wins this year? That's a lot of wins, 65.

Jeez, Althouse, how juvenile is that 'F•ck soccer' remark of yours! You wanna tell me there are no bad calls in football, baseball, basketball? You wanna tell me that refs sometimes don't try to influence the outcome of games here in the U.S.? So American sport is pure as the driven snow, then? No bad calls, no manipulative refs? Uh huh. Yeah. Right.

In this case, though, you had a Muslim referee trying to screw America over. He allowed all sort of physically violent play in the hope the U.S. would lose. Hopefully, FIFA will do what the baseball commissioner refused to do in re that perfect game, and concede that the U.S. goal was a good one and allow us the win.

Bad call, but no more egregious than what you see every day in MLB or the NBA.

The call was a quantum leap of scales beyond an "every day" bad call. It was unjustified and it decided a World Cup match.

There were also at least two muggings of Americans in the box by Slovenians on the same play that warranted penalty shots. It is significant that the linesman, who had to have seen them, did not call them to the referee's attention as required by the laws of soccer.

In the absence of a plausible explanation from the referee, it is not unfair to assume that the call was a result of corruption motivated by animus or cash.

The beautiful game is being tarnished by grappling, diving, whinging players, crooked or incompetent refs and FIFA officials who won't do anything about it.